I hope someone here can help me out one more time. I had a 27" tv in the den and a 19" tv in the patio room next to the den. I ran a cox cable to both of them with the help of a splitter. The reception was somewhat weak especially on the tv in the patio, probably due to the fact it had a much longer run. So I used a 2 output signal amplifier that I purchased at radio shack instead of the splitter. This was all done 10 yrs. ago. It has been working just fine for 10 yrs..
Recently I replace the old 27" tv in the den with a new 32" HD ready tv. I felt that after spending all that money I should try and work at getting the best signal possible. So I replaced the old radio shack signal amp. with a new one from Walmart, it's a Phillips rated at 50-900 MHZ. BTW the old radio shack was rated at 50-450 MHZ. I was amazed at the picture once I got everything connected and turned the tv on, the picture was terrible, fuzzy, lines and ghosts. I took it back for a refund. I then went to circuit city and purchased a Motorola amp. for $50, normally $80, but was on sale. This one didn't do a very good job either, still a lousy picture.
Why would the old radio shack amp. do so much better and these new ones make things worse?
By no means I'm an expert in this area but in looking at the links you posted, a question pops in my mind.
HD reception is broadcasted on the UHF frequency. Could it be that these two amps are NOT for UHF ? Perhaps your old RS amp DOES include UHF.
Cheers
crazycliffy
Unregistered guest
Posted on
chuck, are you saying that with the radioshack amp, it you get better signals on the new HDTV compared to if you use the phillips or circuit city amps? Tell us how you tested it..
I know with the newer HDTV sets these days it requires a higher signal boost to the UHF band, in order to get DTV. On my sony 50", I had to do move the antenna to outside, and do a channel scan (which is important), and then verify the channel integrity..